Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
An Application Under Section 397 Read ... vs Hasibur Rahaman @ Juel And Ors on 16 November, 2016
1 11.2016 35 d CRR 1960 of 2015 In the matter of : An application under Section 397 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Hasnara Khatun @ Purnima
-Versus-
Hasibur Rahaman @ Juel and ors.
Mr. Sabir Ahmed Mr. Abdur Rakib .....for the petitioner.
Mr. Dipankar Mandal .....for the opposite party no. 1.
Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. It is contended that the learned Trial Court has misconstrued the provision of Code of Criminal Procedure so far as the territorial jurisdiction is concerned and more so failed to give an effect to the provision of Section 181(4) Cr.P.C. According to him, the alleged marriage took place in the jurisdiction of North 24 Parganas. After being married, she was driven out from her matrimonial home which is at Jalangi under Murshidabad District. According to the petitioner, she was driven out and stridhan articles are lying in the custody of the opposite party/husband. So, she has filed an application under Section 200 Cr. P.C. 1 2 Initially, the learned Magistrate had called for a report from the I. O concerned. The said I. O has submitted a report. On the basis of the said report, the learned Magistrate has opined that the said court lacks jurisdiction to try the case.
The report of the police officer is not available before this court. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 1 also could not show the report of I. O. concerned.
On perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate, it appears to me that the learned trial court has come to a finding on the basis of erroneous conception of law. In terms of Section 181(4) Cr. P. C where the property was received or misappropriated that place shall be treated as the territorial jurisdiction of the Magistrate. Admittedly, the marriage was held in the district of North 24 Parganas. Stridhan articles were delivered at the time of marriage which indicates that those properties were delivered/received in the jurisdiction of North 24 Parganas. The learned Judicial Magistrate failed to construe the true import of Section 181(4) Cr.P.C. This apart, Section 498A is a continuing offence.
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 1 has cited a decision reported in 2014(3) ACR 2740(SC). On perusal of the said judgement it seems to me that findings of the Hon'ble Apex Court was on a different context and that does not fit in this circumstance.
Accordingly, the criminal revisional application stands allowed and the order of learned Judicial Magistrate is set aside. The learned Magistrate shall 2 3 issue process against the opposite party accused persons at once and will dispose of the matter in accordance with law.
The Department is directed communicate this order to the learned court below at once.
Certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on priority basis upon compliance of all formalities.
(Siddhartha Chattopadhyay ,J.) 3